Melatus claimed that Socrates " did not believe in the gods in whom city believes but in other new divinities" and at the same time accused him for not believing in any Gods (26c-27a). There is a contradiction. Socrates cannot at the same time be an atheist and believe in other new divinities. Therefore, Socrates defended himself by asking a question "if anyone believes in human affairs but not in humans, in equine affairs but not in horses, in flute music but not in flute players " and then asked if any man believed in divine activities but not in divinities? ( 27b-d).
In a way, it might even be seen as a sort of relativist perspective because the gods could develop their own beliefs and commands and change them accordingly and they must always be right. This is what makes Socrates’ claim so essential, it calls into question the Divine Command Theory and questions the real origin of morality. Human civilizations have been going to the gods for their guidance since the beginning of time, but Socrates’ brings insight that stumps the “smart” Euthyphro. In a certain way, this one question can poke a hole in an individual’s view and traditions of religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It is the spring board for disciplines and studies into religious apologetics, because this question that might seem innocuous at first proves to be incredibly powerful.
Is Death a Blessing? Thinking Critically about Socrates’ Argument in Apology In the piece of work, Apology, Socrates argues whether death is a blessing or not and why he believes it to be true. After examining this argument thoroughly, we decided that Socrates makes a good inductive argument about death being a blessing. While writing this paper, we have evidence that the argument is inductive because it is his opinion that death is actually a blessing. Socrates also states in the work, “There is good hope that death is a blessing…” (40c) which makes it known that it is not fully certain, but that is what he believes.
One may argue that Christianity was the mission religion that influenced Zoroastrianism. However, Zoroastrianism predates Christianity, therefore these ideas were already in place before Christianity was being transcribed. An article summoned up the belief that “....upon death and according to its earthly deeds and its acceptance of the Christian faith, the soul enters Heaven, Purgatory or Hell. There it awaits the Last Judgment when the dead shall rise again, the redeemed to enjoy life everlasting and the unsaved to suffer eternally” (Bodhinatha Veylanswami 40-41). This passage summarizes the Christian idea that upon death the soul will either enter Heaven, Purgatory or Hell depending on how that person chose to live their life.
Lastly, Socrate beliefs regarding the death penalty and the laws of Athens are revealed in Crito, as he awaits execution. Before his time
Rather than religion being utilized as a sort of hardware or gadget for getting what one needs, as was valid for Euthyphro's situation, Socrates trusts the basic role of genuine religion is to carry one's own life into amicability with the will of God. Religion and profound quality, in his view, are so firmly related that neither one of the ones can exist separated from the other. Dissimilar to the Sophists, who were familiar with think about the requests of ethical quality as just the wants of the general population who planned them, Socrates has faith in a standard of profound quality that is something more than the human conclusion. He distinguishes it with
In Plato’s dialogue Phaedo, he explains the soul and comes to the conclusion that the soul is immortal. Through describing the last hours of Socrates life before his execution, he lays out three arguments in support of the idea that while the body may cease to exist the soul cannot perish. In this paper, I will explicate Socrates three arguments for the immortality of the soul and their objections. Then I will argue on the presupposition of the Law of Conservation of Mass, that the universe, entailing the soul, must be cyclical. The Law of Conservation of Mass For the efficacy of this argument, I will ask you grant my assumption that is: Mass cannot be created or destroyed.
In the society in which Socrates lives in, the people’s moral values and thinking is dominated by the predisposition of the existence of the Greek gods. Greek gods have strong personalities and are each driven by different interest, so it is extremely difficult to please all
An insight Socrates offers about the self is that there is a conflict between the soul and the body. The soul, which aspires for goodness and pure knowledge, truth, and courage, is weighed down by the body, which is concerned with the less divine and pure pleasures of the earth. It desires objects of lust, sex, and greed, which are physical. These desires chain down the soul, and prevent it from moving towards ultimate goodness and truth after the death of the physical body. As the soul leaves the body, it moves on to another body.
All that a person is should therefore be tied together. Nevertheless, Plato’s arguments for the immortality of a soul make more sense as they, unlike Aristotle’s, follow naturally. If a soul is what makes body alive, which is a statement both philosophers agreed on, it is not logical that it stays trapped inside the body after death. Furthermore, since a soul has affinity for immaterial world as well as for completeness and happiness, it should follow that it is meant for more than this material world, that is